2017 P Cr (PLP)
NASEER KHAN — Petitioner Versus NADIR KHAN and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NASEER KHAN — Petitioner Versus NADIR KHAN and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (NASEER KHAN — Petitioner Versus NADIR KHAN and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shabir Hussain Gigyani for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S. 17(3)
Haraaba
Complainant had charged four persons including accused in the FIR for forcibly snatching Rs. thirty lac from him
Record showed that matter was reported after a delay of six days, for which the explanation furnished by complainant that the elders were trying to patch up the matter between him and accused
First option of the victim in such like incidents, was to rush to the police station for bringing the law into motion for redressal of the grievance
No recovery of the alleged snatched amount was effected from accused either from his direct or indirect possession or on his pointation nor he had confessed his guilt before the competent court of law
Sketch of accused drawn by the local police on the pointation of the complainant did not correspond with the features and structure of the accused
Accused had alleged that amount allegedly snatched from complainant was actually the ownership of some twenty eight persons and he in order to grab the same and to exonerate himself, invented a false drama in the shape of alleged incident by implicating the accused with whom he had got a money dispute
Jirga was held, wherein the complainant on the offer of the Jirga members, was reluctant to take Oath on the Holy Quran regarding truthfulness of the incident
Version of complainant was held to be a false story as per verdict of Jirga
Circumstances and facts established that reasonable grounds existed which made the case of the accused arguable for the purpose of bail
Accused was allowed bail in circumstances. [Para. 4 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, J.
Petitioner Naseer Khan, seeks bail in case FIR No.1617 dated 15.12.2015, registered under section 17(3), Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, in Police Station Pahari Pura.
2. According to version of complainant Nadir Khan on the fateful day he having in his possession rupees thirty lacs, when reached near the shop of one Mashooq, four persons present there, forcibly snatched the amount form him at gun point and made their escape good from the spot; that he identified one of the culprits to be Naseer Khan (present petitioner).
3. Arguments heard and record perused.
4. The incident allegedly took place on 08.12.2015 in Haji Camp Adda in front of Rawalpindi Bus Stand, Peshawar, but has been reported after a delay of six days, for which the explanation furnished by complainant that the elders were trying to patch up the matter between him and the accused, disturbs a prudent mind, as in such like incidents the first option of the victim be to rush the Police Station for bringing the law into motion for redressal of his grievance. No recovery of the alleged snatched amount has been effected from the petitioner either from his direct or indirect possession or on his pointation nor has he confessed his guilt before the competent Court of law. Besides, the sketch of petitioner drawn by the local police on the pointation of the complainant does not correspond with the features and structure of the petitioner as manifest from his snap annexed with the petition. During the course of arguments learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the amount allegedly snatched from complainant was actually the ownership of some twenty eight peoples and he in order to grab the same and to exonerate himself, invented a false drama in the shape of instant case by implicating the petitioner with whom he has got a money dispute. He also referred a Jirga decision arrived between the petitioner and the complainant wherein the complainant on the offer of the Jirga members was reluctant to take Oath on the Holy Quran regarding truthfulness of the present incident and according to the Jirga verdict his version was held to be a false story.
5. In view of what has been discussed above, reasonable grounds exist which make the case of the petitioner arguable for the purpose of bail. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Accused/petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with two local, reliable and resourceful sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Illaqa Judicial Magistrate/MOD, concerned. JK/187/P Petition allowed.